Iran's Strategic Nuclear Deception

Tehran has lulled the West into believing that Iranian nukes will only threaten Israel. No way.

by Craig S. Karpel

Iran's satellite launch earlier this month should have been a wake-up call. Instead, the West has reached over and hit the snooze button.

Swift, vigorous measures need to be taken to deal with the new reality that Iranians, who could possess a nuclear weapon by the end of next year, have demonstrated that their Safir 2 rocket, which was used as the launch vehicle, is able to deliver a warhead to southern Europe.

The New York Times reported:

The Iranian rocket had two stages, Mr. [Charles] Vick said. If it were carrying a small warhead, he said, the Iranian missile could fire the weapon about 2,500 kilometers, or slightly more than 1,550 miles. The rocket could send a weapon to targets in Israel, but experts said that Iran had already possessed that capability.

That falls short of the range of an intercontinental ballistic missile, Mr. Vick said. For Iran to achieve that technical step, he added, it would have to develop a more powerful basic rocket or more upper stages — two goals that weapons experts think it is pursuing.

Dr. [Charles] Ferguson of the Council on Foreign Relations said that Iran's technical advance, if translated into a military missile, might put a warhead within range of southern Europe, including Turkey, Greece, and Italy.

Heritage Foundation senior fellow and former deputy assistant secretary of defense Peter Brookes' reaction to the launch: "In theory, if you can launch a ballistic missile that can place a satellite into Earth orbit, you have the scientific wherewithal to hit a target anywhere on Earth with a warhead."

Most Europeans and Americans are not keenly aware that Iran is on track to having the ability to threaten Kuwait City, Riyadh, Dubai, Istanbul, Athens, Rome, Berlin, Paris, London, New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles with nuclear weapons. They are oblivious to the ultimate aim of the Iranian nuclear weapons program: to transform Iran into the dominant global superpower by enabling its regime to attain hegemonic control of the petroleum production of all of the Gulf region's oil states, while preventing the West from taking military action against Iran by deploying missiles that can obliterate Western cities. Instead, Americans and Europeans are under the impression that the program's main goal is the destruction of Israel.

This misconception has been fostered by numerous statements by senior Iranian officials, including the following:

In December 2000, Ayatollah Ali Hoseyni Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, the country's highest-ranking official, said, "Iran's stance has always been clear on this ugly phenomenon [Israel]. We have repeatedly said that this cancerous tumor of a state should be removed from the region."

In December 2001, former Iranian president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, now head of the Assembly of Experts, which elects the supreme leader, said, "If one day ... the world of Islam comes to possess the weapons currently in Israel's possession [i.e., nuclear weapons] — on that day this method of global arrogance would come to a dead end. This ... is because the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam."

In October 2005, soon after he became president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stated, "As the imam [Ayatollah Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini (1902-1989), central figure of Iran's Islamic revolution and Khamenei's predecessor as supreme leader] said, Israel must be wiped off the map."

In December 2006, Ahmadinejad said, "The Zionist regime [will] soon be wiped out and humanity will be free."

In May 2008, the Iranian president said, "Today the reason for the Zionist regime's existence is questioned, and this regime is on its way to annihilation."

In June 2008, Ahmadinejad said of Israel, rhetorically addressing the memory of Khomeini, "Thanks to God, your [i.e., Khomeini's] wish will soon be realized, and this germ of corruption will be wiped off."

In September 2008, Ahmadinejad said on Iranian television, "Let me tell them [Zionists] that if they themselves do not wrap up Zionism, the strong arm of the peoples will wipe these germs of corruption off the face of the Earth."

Such ravings are too often interpreted as tacitly giving a pass to countries that have the good fortune not to be Israel. For example, Hillary Clinton said during the campaign for the 2008 Democratic nomination that if she were president, Iran's "use of nuclear weapons against Israel would provoke a nuclear response from the United States." Evidently it didn't occur to the present secretary of state that a U.S. nuclear attack on Iran could result in an Iranian nuclear attack on the U.S.

Barack Obama proclaimed in a June 2008 speech at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) annual conference that he is aware of the gravity of the Iranian nuclear threat to Israel. But there is disturbing evidence that he does not perceive Iran as posing a direct threat to the U.S.

Tehran has succeeded in minimizing Western concern about Iran's nuclear weapons program by making it seem to be somebody else's problem.

A few weeks before his AIPAC speech, Mr. Obama told a rally: "Strong countries and strong presidents talk to their adversaries. That's what Kennedy did with Khrushchev. That's what Reagan did with Gorbachev. That's what Nixon did with Mao. I mean, think about it. Iran, Cuba, Venezuela — these countries are tiny compared to the Soviet Union. They don't pose a serious threat to us the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us. And yet we were willing to talk to the Soviet Union at the time when they were saying we're going to wipe you off the planet."

In reality, Iran (which, by the way, isn't all that tiny: with an area of 636,296 square miles, it's bigger than Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Spain, and Portugal combined, and its population is 66,000,000) would pose more of a nuclear threat to us than the Soviet Union did, because the Soviets could be — and, as it turned out, were — deterred.

Those who maintain that it will be possible for the West to "live with a nuclear Iran" because Tehran will supposedly be deterred by the Western nuclear arsenal appear to be afflicted with some sort of cognitive dysfunction that blocks them from comprehending the implications of Shi'a Islam's belief that an apocalyptic war is both inevitable and desirable, grasping Shi'ite doctrinal preference for the delights of the afterlife over the tribulations of worldly existence, and drawing appropriate conclusions from the Islamic regime's incessant glorification of "martyrdom," culminating in Ahmadinejad's assertion that "millions" of Iranians are prepared to die in the conflict between their country and its enemies.

The stream of invective calling for, predicting, and/or gloating in advance about the elimination of Israel constitutes one of the most effective strategic deceptions in history. Tehran has succeeded in minimizing Western concern about Iran's nuclear weapons program by making it seem to be somebody else's problem.

On February 4 a meeting, scheduled before the Iranian satellite launch was announced, was held in Wiesbaden, Germany, of a working group known as the P5+1, whose purpose is to coordinate Iranian nuclear weapons policy among the five permanent members of the UN Security Council — China, France, Russia, the UK, and the U.S. — plus Germany. The U.S. was represented by Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William J. Burns. The British, French, and German attendees were dismayed to find that the American diplomat was unable to tell the group what the Obama administration's Iran policy is. Burns said that the administration has not yet formulated its policy toward Tehran and that doing so will take approximately two months.

With each passing day bringing the world one day closer to the waking nightmare of a nuclear-armed Iran, it is remarkable that the administration of a president whose main electoral promise in the realm of foreign affairs was that he would shift to multilateralism and diplomacy has introduced a two-month delay into the process of multilaterally coordinating the efforts of diplomats.

Could this lack of urgency result from the misperception that if attempts at multilateral diplomacy fail, the cities that will be targeted by the nuclear weapons Iran will deploy will be located in a country other than the United States?

Featured at Aish.com:

The opinions expressed in the comment section are the personal views of the commenters. Comments are moderated, so please keep it civil.

Visitor Comments: 16

(16)
Andrew Spector,
December 5, 2010 3:07 PM

# 3 and # 6 Henry and deborah have their heads in the sand

For #3 and # 6 take your heads out of the sand. You cannot talk to religious fantatics or Jew haters. The Iranian mullahs reflect both, and mutual assured destruction (MAD) under the former Cold War with the Soviets does not apply here. Deterrence cannot be achieved with a nuclearized iran. They want you dead and they're coming for you. Do you fully understand this enemy ? Wake up and get real.

(15)
Jose Pineda,
July 11, 2009 9:59 PM

Israel's nukes, too. What's the deal?

Anyone here knows who Mordechai Vanunu is? Israel's supposed to have between 200 and 400 warheads, what's the deal? Stop being paranoid. Ahmadinejad knows very well the moment he launches a single missile westwards, a second later Teheran is obliterated from Earth. And Yazd, Ispahan, etc. Ruling over a bunch of ghosts is not fun at all.

(14)
Gary Katz,
March 26, 2009 8:08 AM

The true nature of the Iranian threat

I am more concerned with Iran or Pakistan supplying a terrorist group with a nuke to conduct a sneak attack on Israel (or the U.S.). Then the country could deny knowledge, which would raise just enough doubt to deter massive retaliation. Israel might be forced to adopt a policy that, if she is nuked, she will attack Iran no matter what. You know, the Saddam/scud approach.

(13)
yosef,
March 3, 2009 2:12 PM

hey victor #10...

...you should have kept reading, the author addressed your thoughts. First he states: "the ultimate aim of the Iranian nuclear weapons program: to transform Iran into the dominant global superpower by enabling its regime to attain hegemonic control of the petroleum production of all of the Gulf region's oil states, while preventing the West from taking military action against Iran by deploying missiles that can obliterate Western cities."
also, your last assertion is once again answered later in the article: Iran's actions are not 'all about the money' because "Those who maintain that it will be possible for the West to "live with a nuclear Iran" because Tehran will supposedly be deterred by the Western nuclear arsenal appear to be afflicted with some sort of cognitive dysfunction that blocks them from comprehending the implications of Shi'a Islam's belief that an apocalyptic war is both inevitable and desirable, grasping Shi'ite doctrinal preference for the delights of the afterlife over the tribulations of worldly existence, and drawing appropriate conclusions from the Islamic regime's incessant glorification of "martyrdom," culminating in Ahmadinejad's assertion that "millions" of Iranians are prepared to die in the conflict between their country and its enemies."

(12)
Irwin Ruff,
March 1, 2009 7:37 AM

The Jews don't count

Mr. Wasserman is correct - the Jews are hated. And because of this, the other nations really don't care what happens to Israel or to other Jews. If the Iranians did atom bomb Israel, the US, especially under the current president, would probably say "Tut, tut. You really shouldn't have done that. Why don't we sit down and talk." The Americans don't care what happens to Israel. They'll wake up only when one of their cities is destroyed.

(11)
Mike Montagne,
February 27, 2009 12:22 PM

Iranian Nuclear Threat

All the infrmation needed to build a crude "atom bomb" was available to the general public while atmosheric test was acceptable. It would'nt take a genius to fabricate a simple " gun-Type" device, that one Killed almost 250 thousand, (mostly innocent) civilians.Added to "public common Knowledge" Was a program on the Knowledge net work only a few year's back that announced to all would-be nuclear weapons makers that during the Soviets bomb development.They could only achieve about 70% purity and when those fisile peices were slammed together, it still produced an estimated 18Kilo ton blast!( Hirosimas, was about 20 Kilo tons.I suppse that seeing that Russia is supplying Iran, that,that bit of info has/was passed on already. Added to the reigious penchant for giving their lives to go to the next life,radiation exposer probly not much of a concern while handling radioactive materials

(10)
victor,
February 27, 2009 12:12 PM

Rational thought please

Most Europeans and Americans are not keenly aware that Iran is on track to having the ability to threaten Kuwait City,.... Istanbul
I stopped reading there. After signing a gas deal with Turkey, Iran is now up for nuking them? Where is the business sense in that? 'It's all about the money'.

(9)
Rachav,
February 25, 2009 4:16 PM

Iran Missiles

Anonymous, funny name that. If Iran does decide on a Nuclear Final Solution, exactly who in America will have the power to defend anyone let alone the US in this economic climate. Congress would probably just include Iran as a recipient of the Bailout! And as someone has already pointed out America didn't get into WW2 until 1942. And so far history has not shown any inclination on the part of the US under Republican or Democrat govt. to even allow Israel to take out the Iranian nuclear threat. The world right now is ripe for the war sometimes called 'Armageddon.' What we need now is a very strong and righteous Israeli govt. But I am not holding my breath.

(8)
Marc Milton-Talbot,
February 24, 2009 11:35 PM

History repeats itself

In his book "Mein Kampf" Hitler clearly outlined the plans he had for the Jewish people and the rest of Eastern Europe.It was there,years ahead of the War,for all to read.Did anyone outside Germany bother?Maybe not even Churchill,even though he alone saw the danger.We have the same situation with Ahmedinajad.He has clearly stated that he will wipe Israel off the face of the earth,and he has proceeded accordingly,just like Hitler,to provide Iran with the necessary weapons in order to carry out his plan.We wonder why,in hindsight,why Hitler and the Nazis were not taken out before they got too strong.In a few years time,the same question will be asked about Ahmedinajad's Iran.I'm sure that the Iranian people don't want to commit national suicide[which will certainly be their fate if they sucessfully launch a nuclear strike on Israel] any more than the average German would have wished for the destruction of Germany under that bunch of fanatics following their insane Nazi dogma.

(7)
Anonymous,
February 24, 2009 4:34 PM

Iran missles

You make it sound as if America was attack wed just sit and let it happen, like we arent able to defend America.*or* just wont? This just makes me angry.

(6)
Henry,
February 24, 2009 3:37 PM

Real solution

You can not stop technological advances in other countries by stating that they have double usage. A tissue box has a dual use too! Its tissues can clean the mouth or suffocate/kill somebody. The real solution would be mideast peach, 2 country solution and no nuclear weapon in mideast. I am afraid to say that the era of double standard is close to end! I also searched and see that Iran has never invaded any country over the past few hundred years. Even in their great days, many thousand years ago, Cyprus was king of the kings, meaning if they took over some places, they never changed the ruling system. They only created a dotted line of reporting.
So, create a 2 state solution and sign up withy no nuclear arm policy.

(5)
agnes Csato,
February 24, 2009 2:41 PM

America sleeps always tight "Remember Pearl Harbour"

America always reacts too late. It happened in 1939, and during the nazis murder of 6 mil.Jews in Europe. It happens with Cuca (look at the results) and look how deep America sleeps while his neighbour Chavez starts to foul aroundthe same way Castro did. I would tell Amrica to wake up this time, before Venezuela and Iran will eat up Israel and the United States. Obama open up wide your eyes and keep one open while you sleep.I predict a black future for the West if they keep dozing.

(4)
Alan Turner,
February 24, 2009 11:09 AM

Strange isn't it?
America didn't get involved in WW2 until Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. Is the US waiting till New York or Washington are nuked by Iran before doing what is rapidly becoming neede.

(3)
Deborah Bach,
February 24, 2009 9:47 AM

Breathe deeply and pray

I know that my opinion will probably be different than most, but I think that it's important not to be hysterical. Taking time to formulate a well thought out policy is a good thing. Talking to Iran is also what should be done. It models what we want the Iranians to do. Dialogue. That doesn't mean giving in out of fear, but it does mean seeing where there are openings to change Iranian policy. Let's all pray to God that Obama is successful!

(2)
David Wasserman,
February 24, 2009 9:30 AM

When

When will the rest of the world learn that as Jews we are hated? We are the most disliked people on the face of the earth. When will the USA take actiion against this and destroy the plans of Iran? If Israel tkae action, we will be held up to more hate and retallation.

(1)
James Christy,
February 24, 2009 9:10 AM

Wake Up!!!!!!

I have to a gree with Mr. Karpel. I grew up with the threat of the Soviet Union. People have been fed propaganda for so long they take it at face value. Look what happened in New York. It may have taken three tries but they got what they wanted. As an American it amazes me that my fellow country men think that a nuclear attack can't happen here. If nothing is done one day there'll be another 9/11 only this time New York will cease to exist and become unlivible for thousands of years.

I've been striving to get more into spirituality. But it seems that every time I make some progress, I find myself slipping right back to where I started. I'm getting discouraged and feel like a failure. Can you help?

The Aish Rabbi Replies:

Spiritual slumps are a natural part of spiritual growth. There is a cycle that people go through when at times they feel closer to God and at times more distant. In the words of the Kabbalists, it is "two steps forward and one step back." So although you feel you are slipping, know that this is a natural process. The main thing is to look at your overall progress (over months or years) and be able to see how far you've come!

This is actually God's ingenious way of motivating us further. The sages compare this to teaching a baby how to walk. When the parent is holding on, the baby shrieks with delight and is under the illusion that he knows how to walk. Yet suddenly, when the parent lets go, the child panics, wobbles and may even fall.

At such times when we feel spiritually "down," that is often because God is letting go, giving us the great gift of independence. In some ways, these are the times when we can actually grow the most. For if we can move ourselves just a little bit forward, we truly acquire a level of sanctity that is ours forever.

Here is a practical tool to help pull you out of the doldrums. The Sefer HaChinuch speaks about a great principle in spiritual growth: "The external awakens the internal." This means that although we may not experience immediate feelings of closeness to God, eventually, by continuing to conduct ourselves in such a manner, this physical behavior will have an impact on our spiritual selves and will help us succeed. (A similar idea is discussed by psychologists who say: "Smile and you will feel happy.")

That is the power of Torah commandments. Even if we may not feel like giving charity or praying at this particular moment, by having a "mitzvah" obligation to do so, we are in a framework to become inspired. At that point we can infuse that act of charity or prayer with all the meaning and lift it can provide. But if we'd wait until being inspired, we might be waiting a very long time.

May the Almighty bless you with the clarity to see your progress, and may you do so with joy.

In 1940, a boatload 1,600 Jewish immigrants fleeing Hitler's ovens was denied entry into the port of Haifa; the British deported them to the island of Mauritius. At the time, the British had acceded to Arab demands and restricted Jewish immigration into Palestine. The urgent plight of European Jewry generated an "illegal" immigration movement, but the British were vigilant in denying entry. Some ships, such as the Struma, sunk and their hundreds of passengers killed.

If you seize too much, you are left with nothing. If you take less, you may retain it (Rosh Hashanah 4b).

Sometimes our appetites are insatiable; more accurately, we act as though they were insatiable. The Midrash states that a person may never be satisfied. "If he has one hundred, he wants two hundred. If he gets two hundred, he wants four hundred" (Koheles Rabbah 1:34). How often have we seen people whose insatiable desire for material wealth resulted in their losing everything, much like the gambler whose constant urge to win results in total loss.

People's bodies are finite, and their actual needs are limited. The endless pursuit for more wealth than they can use is nothing more than an elusive belief that they can live forever (Psalms 49:10).

The one part of us which is indeed infinite is our neshamah (soul), which, being of Divine origin, can crave and achieve infinity and eternity, and such craving is characteristic of spiritual growth.

How strange that we tend to give the body much more than it can possibly handle, and the neshamah so much less than it needs!